Dataset Information

Validation of the International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision Code for the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale Score.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Administrative data can be useful for stroke research but have historically lacked data on stroke severity. Hospitals increasingly report the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) score using an International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision (ICD-10) diagnosis code, but this code's validity remains unclear.

Methods

We examined the concordance of ICD-10 NIHSS scores versus NIHSS scores recorded in CAESAR (Cornell Acute Stroke Academic Registry). We included all patients with acute ischemic stroke from October 1, 2015, when US hospitals transitioned to ICD-10, through 2018, the latest year in our registry. The NIHSS score (range, 0-42) recorded in our registry served as the reference gold standard. ICD-10 NIHSS scores were derived from hospital discharge diagnosis code R29.7xx, with the latter 2 digits representing the NIHSS score. Multiple logistic regression was used to explore factors associated with availability of ICD-10 NIHSS scores. We used ANOVA to examine the proportion of variation (R²) in the true (registry) NIHSS score that was explained by the ICD-10 NIHSS score.

Results

Among 1357 patients, 395 (29.1%) had an ICD-10 NIHSS score recorded. This proportion increased from 0% in 2015 to 46.5% in 2018. In a logistic regression model, only higher registry NIHSS score (odds ratio per point, 1.05 [95% CI, 1.03-1.07]) and cardioembolic stroke (odds ratio, 1.4 [95% CI, 1.0-2.0]) were associated with availability of the ICD-10 NIHSS score. In an ANOVA model, the ICD-10 NIHSS score explained almost all the variation in the registry NIHSS score (R²=0.88). Fewer than 10% of patients had a large discordance (≥4 points) between their ICD-10 and registry NIHSS scores.

Conclusions

When present, ICD-10 codes representing NIHSS scores had excellent agreement with NIHSS scores recorded in our stroke registry. However, ICD-10 NIHSS scores were often missing, especially in less severe strokes, limiting the reliability of these codes for risk adjustment.

SUBMITTER: Kamel H

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10237010 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Validation of the <i>International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision</i> Code for the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale Score.

Kamel Hooman H Liberman Ava L AL Merkler Alexander E AE Parikh Neal S NS Mir Saad A SA Segal Alan Z AZ Zhang Cenai C Díaz Iván I Navi Babak B BB

Circulation. Cardiovascular quality and outcomes 20230302 3

<h4>Background</h4>Administrative data can be useful for stroke research but have historically lacked data on stroke severity. Hospitals increasingly report the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) score using an <i>International Classification of Diseases</i>, <i>Tenth Revision</i> (<i>ICD-10</i>) diagnosis code, but this code's validity remains unclear.<h4>Methods</h4>We examined the concordance of <i>ICD-10</i> NIHSS scores versus NIHSS scores recorded in CAESAR (Cornell Acute S ...[more]

PMID: 36862375

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundInjury Severity Score (ISS) is a measurement of injury severity based on the Abbreviated Injury Scale. Because of the difficulty and expense of Abbreviated Injury Scale coding, there have been recent efforts in mapping ISS from administrative International Classification of Diseases ( ICD ) codes instead. Specifically, the open source and freely available International Classification of Diseases Programs for Injury Categorization (ICDPIC) in R (Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria) converts International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, codes to ISS. This study aims to compare ICDPIC calculations versus manually derived Trauma Quality Improvement Program (TQIP) calculations for International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision ( ICD-10 ), codes. Moderate concordance was chosen as the hypothetical relationship because of previous work by both Fleischman et al. ( J Trauma Nurs. 2017;24(1):4-14) who found moderate to substantial concordance between ICDPIC and ISS and Di Bartolomeo et al. ( Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med. 2010;18(1):17) who found none to slight concordance. Given these very different findings, we thought it reasonable to predict moderate concordance with the use of more detailed ICD-10 codes.MethodsThis was an observational cohort study of 1,040,728 encounters in the TQIP registry for the year 2018. International Classification of Diseases Programs for Injury Categorization in R was used to derive ISS from the ICD-10 codes in the registry. The resulting scores were compared with the manually derived ISS in TQIP.ResultsThe median difference between ISS calculated by ICDPIC-2021 using ICD-10, Clinical Modification (ISS-ICDPIC), and manually derived ISS was -3 (95% confidence interval, -5 to 0), while the mean difference was -2.09 (95% confidence interval, -2.10 to -2.07). There was substantial concordance between ISS-ICDPIC and manually derived ISS ( κ = 0.66). The ISS-ICDPIC was a better predictor of mortality (area under the curve, 0.853 vs. 0.836) but a worse predictor of intensive care unit admission (area under the curve, 0.741 vs. 0.757) and hospital stay ≥10 days (AUC, 0.701 vs. 0.743). The ICDPIC has substantial concordance with TQIP for the firearm ( κ = 0.69), motor vehicle trauma ( κ = 0.71), and pedestrian ( κ = 0.73) injury mechanisms.ConclusionWhen TQIP data are unavailable, ICDPIC remains a valid way to calculate ISS after transition to ICD-10 codes. The ISS-ICDPIC performs well in predicting a number of outcomes of interest but is best served as a predictor of mortality.Level of evidencePrognostic and Epidemiological; Level III.

Project description:Importance:On October 1, 2015, the US transitioned to the International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-10-CM) for recording diagnoses, symptoms, and procedures. It is unknown whether this transition was associated with changes in diagnostic category prevalence based on diagnosis classification systems commonly used for payment and quality reporting. Objective:To assess changes in diagnostic category prevalence associated with the ICD-10-CM transition. Design, Setting, and Participants:This interrupted time series analysis and cross-sectional study examined level and trend changes in diagnostic category prevalence associated with the ICD-10-CM transition and clinically reviewed a subset of diagnostic categories with changes of 20% or more. Data included insurance claim diagnoses from the IBM MarketScan Commercial Database from January 1, 2010, to December 31, 2017, for more than 18 million people aged 0 to 64 years with private insurance. Diagnoses were mapped using 3 common diagnostic classification systems: World Health Organization (WHO) disease chapters, Department of Health and Human Services Hierarchical Condition Categories (HHS-HCCs), and Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Clinical Classification System (AHRQ-CCS). Data were analyzed from December 1, 2018, to January 21, 2020. Exposures:US implementation of ICD-10-CM. Main Outcomes and Measures:Monthly rates of individuals with at least 1 diagnosis in a diagnostic classification category per 10 000 eligible members. Results:The analytic sample contained information on 2.1 billion enrollee person-months with 3.4 billion clinically assigned diagnoses; the mean (range) monthly sample size was 22.1 (18.4 to 27.1 ) million individuals. While diagnostic category prevalence changed minimally for WHO disease chapters, the ICD-10-CM transition was associated with level changes of 20% or more among 20 of 127 HHS-HCCs (15.7%) and 46 of 282 AHRQ-CCS categories (16.3%) and with trend changes of 20% or more among 12 of 127 of HHS-HCCs (9.4%) and 27 of 282 of AHRQ-CCS categories (9.6%). For HHS-HCCs, monthly rates of individuals with any acute myocardial infarction diagnosis increased 131.5% (95% CI, 124.1% to 138.8%), primarily because HHS added non-ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction diagnoses to this category. The HHS-HCC for diabetes with chronic complications increased by 92.4% (95% CI, 84.2% to 100.5%), primarily from including new diabetes-related hypoglycemia and hyperglycemia codes, and the rate for completed pregnancy with complications decreased by 54.5% (95% CI, -58.7% to -50.2%) partly due to removing vaginal birth after cesarean delivery as a complication. Conclusions and Relevance:These findings suggest that the ICD-10-CM transition was associated with large prevalence changes for many diagnostic categories. Diagnostic classification systems developed using ICD-9-CM may need to be refined using ICD-10-CM data to avoid unintended consequences for disease surveillance, performance assessment, and risk-adjusted payments.

Project description:BackgroundAdministrative claims for aortic stenosis (AS) regurgitation may be useful, but their accuracy and ability to identify individuals at risk for valve-related outcomes have not been well characterized.MethodsUsing echocardiographic (transthoracic echocardiogram [TTE]) reports linked to US Medicare claims, 2017 to 2018, the performance of candidate International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision claims to ascertain AS/aortic regurgitation was evaluated. The optimal performing algorithm was tested against outcomes at 1-year after TTE in a separate 100% sample of US Medicare claims, 2017 to 2019.ResultsOf those included in the derivation (N=5497, mean age 74.4±11.0 years, 49.7% female), any AS or aortic regurgitation was present in 24% and 38.8%, respectively. The sensitivity and specificity of International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision code I35.0 for identification of any AS was 53.1% and 94.8%, respectively. Among those with an I35.0 code, 40.3% had severe AS. Claims were unable to distinguish disease severity (ie, severe versus nonsevere) or subtype (eg, bicuspid or rheumatic AS), and were insensitive and nonspecific for aortic regurgitation of any severity. Among all beneficiaries who received a TTE (N=4 033 844), adjusting for age, sex, and 27 comorbidities, those with an I35.0 code had a higher adjusted risk of all-cause mortality (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.33 [95% CI, 1.31-1.34]), heart failure hospitalization (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.37 [95% CI, 1.34-1.41]), and aortic valve replacement (adjusted hazard ratio, 34.96 [95% CI, 33.74-36.22]).ConclusionsAmong US Medicare beneficiaries receiving a TTE, International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision claims, though identifying a population at significant greater risk of valve-related outcomes, failed to identify nearly half of individuals with AS and were unable to distinguish disease severity or subtype. These results argue against the widespread use of International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision claims to screen for patients with AS and suggests the need for improved coding algorithms and alternative systems to extract TTE data for quality improvement and hospital benchmarking.